Registered Sale Deed cannot be questioned in evidence
It took nearly half a century to reach this conclusion, which, from the very start, was an obvious legal position and ought to have been held as such throughout. The coin was flipped so many times that the final result felt like a lucky draw, full of uncertainty about who win this battle.
We often hear that it is the land or an immovable property that is passed down through the generations, but at the same time, land/ property gets passed down together with the disputes, which we as lawyers then call a legacy case or a legacy dispute. Another one in the long list of legacy cases related to a Land dispute is Hemlata v. Tukaram.
The story in this case started with a mortgage on a property, which was later sold to another party to repay the loans. The sale was done by way of a registered sale deed. Seemed like a simple sale deed, but facts were manipulated in a way that the sale deed was challenged, and the challenge went to the appellate court, to the high court, and finally, the Supreme Court put an end to this legacy case.
The question that arose was whether oral evidence can overlook a wellregistered sale deed merely because the seller says he didn't intend to sell the land.
The Supreme Court has made it crystal clear that a duly registered deed cannot be questioned about its validity just because the executor of such a deed says he didn't intend to do so or wanted to make it conditional. If he thought of doing it a certain way, then he'd better put it in the deed; otherwise, it doesn't matter what he thought or not, because decades later, no one remembers what was said by whom. All anyone can remember is what's been penned down.
In this case, Tukaram mortgaged his house in 1966; couldn’t pay; got someone to clear the debt; signed a registered sale deed for ₹10,000 in 1971; signed a registered rent agreement on the same day; defaulted on rent within 14 months; admitted the tenancy in writing in 1974; promised to pay arrears; paid one month and vanished; eviction proceedings filed in 1975; and only then, in 1977, Tukaram woke up and claimed that the entire transaction was a “sham mortgage”.
That is not the behaviour of a man who genuinely believed he had been tricked out of his house. That is the behaviour of a tenant who saw the rent notice and decided to rewrite history. And the Trial Court bought it.
The High Court bought it too.
But the Supreme Court said: Enough!
LEGAL LEARNING
Through this judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has reaffirmed the legal position that registered legal documents are not toys to be tossed around like that. Every time a court declares a registered document a sham based on oral evidence and sympathy towards one party, it takes away the credibility of the documents necessary for property transactions made in India daily.
In conclusion, it's now a settled position of law that a registered Sale Deed carries with it a strong legal presumption of its being valid and genuine. Registration is not just a procedural formality but a legally binding act that gives significant legal sanctity to the document. Thus, a court must not lightly or casually declare a registered document as a “sham”.
Authors: Kalyani / Shashank Agarwal
Advocates & Corporate Law Consultants
LEGUM SOLIS
